Contrary to the purpose stated by the BJP-led Centre government, he added, the effects of the abrogation will be completely "opposite and regressive".
The purpose behind the introduction of Article 370 in the Constitution was to integrate Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of the country, and an abrogation that “hasn’t been thought out through” will only have adverse impact on the region, senior Congress leader Salman Khurshid said here on Saturday.
“It’s going to have an adverse impact…you haven’t given us the alternative as to how Kashmir would get integrated in a manner in which it should, and integration doesn’t mean obliteration of their aspirations, but integration in the most wholesome sense. I believe it hasn’t been thought out through,” the former Union minister said at the ongoing Times LitFest at India Habitat Centre.
- '15 days enough to transport all migrants home', Supreme Court tells Centre, states
- Reverse migration: CM Hemant Soren says migrant workers must furnish job, personal details before leaving Jharkhand
- Rajya Sabha election 2020: Congress crisis deepens as another Gujarat MLA quits, third resignation in 3 days
He added that Jammu & Kashmir’s integration wasn’t achieved for a variety of reasons and to think it can be achieved through the abrogation of Article 370 was a “very wild imagination”.
“Everyone accepts that Article 370 was a temporary provision of the Constitution. Critically it reflected an aspiration and attempt and endeavour to ensure that Kashmir psychologically, physically, and spiritually remains connected with the idea of India. “That was the purpose and I believe that purpose wasn’t entirely achieved for a variety of reasons, but that purpose will be achieved by abrogation of 370, I think it is a very wild imagination,” the 66-years-old leader said.
Contrary to the purpose stated by the BJP-led Centre government, he added, the effects of the abrogation will be completely “opposite and regressive”.
“There are implications and possible events in the future that would be very regressive and in fact would be completely opposite to the purpose for which it has been stated to be done,” said the former external affairs minister.